On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 05:44:34PM +0100, Smelly Pooh wrote:
> Um... no, sounds like some blind Linux advocate fabricating bullshit to cover
> up another Linux shortcoming. Stateful information a memory hog? Excuse me,
> but the kernel buffers used to hold the tcp/udp data from connections are
> only orders of magnitude bigger. How did you become such an expert on
> [snip rant]
first of all in your entire ad homein attack this is the only relevant
argument on your side. it does add a level of complexity that i don't
think is needed. as paul described one can design a network that doesn't
need it so i don't see why it should be inflicted on those who don't need
and now that i recall you also mentioned that linux's userland packet
access was inefficient. how do you justify that - do you have any
benchmarks that demonstrate that? and my understanding is that the
networking folks working on linux have put forward a number of versions
of firewalling and packet access, so which one were you covering? and
how would you compare them?
i'd be far more interested in a post that covered those points rather
then some rant.
kevin at suberic.net "we were goin' for breakfast. in canada. we
fork()'ed on 37058400 made a deal: if she'd stop hookin', i'd stop
meatspace place: work shootin' people. maybe we were aiming high."
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!